In a decision of 26 November 2019, the Court of Appeal Arnhem-Leeuwarden deduced from the Court of Justice’s decision in Skanska that the EU concept undertaking is to be used to determine the entity which is required to provide compensation for damage caused by an infringement of Article 101 TFEU, even in cases where there is no issue of economic continuity. The Court of Appeal held a legal person, Cogelex, liable for the damage caused to TenneT the Gas Insulated Switchgear (GIS) cartel. The Court founded Cogelex’s liability on the fact that the latter, in the opinion of the Court, formed part of the same undertaking as the entities of the Alstom Group that were fined in public enforcement proceedings at the EU level for their participation in the said cartel. [1] However, Cogelex
Share on
|
|
The Dutch Court of Appeal finds a subsidiary liable for the cartel damage caused by a minority shareholder that had or could have a decisive influence over it (Cogelex)
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers
Already Subscribed? Sign-in
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.
Read one article for free
Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.
